Nature of Organizational Politics

1. Nature of Organizational Politics Constituents:- Introductions Factors Political strategies and tactics Unethical political strategies and tactics Exercising control

2. INTRODUCTION • Organizational politics is the plan, tactics and strategies for seizing, holding, extracting and executing power in organizations. It has been observed that the meaning of organizational politics has remained largely blurred in spite of the importance of political behavior to the functioning of organizations. Political behavior is the response of individuals or groups that involve the use of power and influence to channel decisions in preferred direction within organizations.

3. FACTORS CONTIBUTING TO ORGANIZATIO NAL POLITICS • Pyramid-shaped organization structure: A pyramid concentrates power at the top. Only so much power is therefore available to distribute among the many people who would like more of it. Each successive layer on the organization chart has less power than the layer above. At the very bottom of the organization, workers have virtually no power. Since most organizations today have fewer layers than they previously had, the competition for power has become more intense. • Subjective standards of performance: People often resort to organizational politics because they do not believe that the organization has an objective and fair way of judging their performance and suit­ability for promotion. Similarly, when managers have no objective way of differ­entiating effective people from the less effective, they will resort to favoritism.

4. FACTORS CONTIBUTING TO ORGANIZATIO NAL POLITICS • Environmental uncertainty and turbulence: When people operate in an unsta­ble and unpredictable environment, they tend to behave politically. They rely on organizational politics to create a favorable impression because uncertainty makes it difficult to determine what they should really be accomplishing. The uncertainty, turbulence, and insecurity created by corporate mergers or downsizing is a major contributor to office politics. • Emotional insecurity: Some people resort to political maneuvers to ingratiate themselves with superi­ors because they lack confidence in their talents and skills.

5. FACTORS CONTIBUTING TO ORGANIZATIO NAL POLITICS • Manipulative tendencies: Some people engage in political behavior because they want to manipulate others, sometimes for their own personal advantage. • Disagreements that prevent rational decision making: Many executives attempt to use rational criteria when making major decisions, but rational decision making is constrained by major disagreements over ­what the organization should be doing. Unless strategy and goals are shared strongly among key organizational members, political moti­vation is inevitable in organizational decision making.

6. Strategies and Tactics Aimed Directly at Gaining Power. It could be argued that all political tactics are aimed at acquiring and maintaining power, if we consider power in a broad scope. ­Tom Peters ­says that, although power can often be abused, it can also be used to benefit many people, "and as a career building tool, the slow and steady (and subtle) amassing of power is the surest road to success." • Strategies and Tactics Aimed at Building Relationships. Much of organizational politics involves building positive relationships with network members who can be helpful now or later. This network includes superiors, subordinates, other lower-ranking people, coworkers, external customers, and suppliers. The follow­ing are several representative strategies and tactics

7. POTENTIALLY UNETHICAL POLITICAL STRATEGIES AND TACTICS • Back Stabbing. The ubiquitous back stab requires that you pretend to be nice, but all the while plan someone's demise. A frequent form of back stabbing is to initiate a conversation with a rival about the weaknesses of a common boss, en­couraging negative commentary and making careful mental notes of what the person says. When these comments are passed along to the boss, the rival appears disloyal and foolish. Email has become a medium for back stabbing. The sender of the message documents a mistake made by another individual and includes key people on the distribution list. A sample message sent by one manager to a ri­val began as follows, "Hi, Sam. I'm sorry you couldn't make our important meet­ing. I guess you had some other important priorities. But we need your input on the following major agenda item we tackled . . . ."

8. 2. Purge All But Loyalists. The ancient strategy of purge those you have conquered suggests that you remove from the organization rivals who suffered past hurts through your ef­forts; otherwise the wounded rivals might retaliate at a vulnerable moment. This kind of strategy is common after a hostile takeover or even a merger of equals, e.g., the purge of former Chrysler Corporation executives by the former Daimler-Benz executives after the merger to form DaimlerChrysler. • 3. Set a Person Up for Failure. The object of a setup is to place a person in a po­sition where he or she will either fail outright or look ineffective. For example, an executive whom the CEO dislikes might be given responsibility for a troubled di­vision whose market is rapidly collapsing. The newly assigned division president cannot stop the decline and is then fired for poor performance.

9. 4. Exert Undue Pressure. Even if you have the power to do this, it would be unethical if used to further your interests at the expense of others. In any case, it may have longer-term repercussions. • 5. Divide and Conquer.An ancient military and governmental strategy, this tactic is also used in business. The object is to have peers struggle among themselves, therefore yielding the balance of power to another person. If team members are not aligned with one another, there is an improved chance that they will align with a common superior. One way of getting subordinates to fight with one another is to place them in intense competition for resources.

10. 6. Play Territorial Games. Also referred to as turf wars, territorial games involve protecting and hoarding resources that give one power, such as information, rela­tionships, and decision-making authority. A rela­tionship is "hoarded" in such ways as not encouraging others to visit a key cus­tomer, or blocking a high performer from getting a promotion or transfer. Other examples of territorial games include monopolizing time with clients, scheduling meetings so someone cannot attend, and shutting out coworkers from joining you on an important assignment.

12. EXERCISING CONTROL OVER DYSFUNCTIONAL POLITICS • Although necessary, organizational politics can hurt an organization and its mem­bers when carried to excess. Too much politicking can result in lower morale, higher turnover, and wasted time and effort, thereby lowering performance. To avoid these neg­ative consequences, leaders should combat political behavior when it is excessive and dysfunctional. Some steps that can help accomplish this follow.

13. 1. To control politics, organizational leaders must be aware of its causes and techniques. For example, during a downsizing, the CEO can be on the alert for instances of back stabbing and transparent attempts to please him or her. • 2. Open communication also can constrain the impact of politi­cal behavior. For instance, open communication can let everyone know the basis for allocating resources, thus reducing the amount of political behavior. When communication is open, it also makes it more difficult for some people to control information and pass along gossip as a political weapon. • 3. Avoiding favoritism is a potent way of minimizing politics within a work group. If group members believe that getting the boss to like them is much less important than good job performance in obtaining rewards, they will try to impress the boss through task-related activities.

14. 4. Setting good examples at the top of the organization can help reduce the fre­quency and intensity of organizational politics. When leaders are nonpolitical in their actions, they demonstrate in subtle ways that political behavior is not wel­come. It may be helpful for the leader to announce during a staff meeting that de­vious political behavior is undesirable and unprofessional. • 5. Another way of reducing the extent of political behavior is for individuals and the organization to have goal congruence, i.e., share the same goals, with thorough understanding of what they mean. If political behavior will interfere with the company and individuals achieving their goals, workers with goal congruence are less likely to play office politics excessively.

15. 6. Politics can sometimes be constrained by a threat to discuss question­able information in a public forum. People who practice devious politics usually want to operate secretly and privately. They are willing to drop hints and innuen­does and make direct derogatory comments about someone else, provided they will not be identified as the source. An effective way of stopping the discrediting of others is to offer to discuss the topic publicly.

16. CONFLICTS

17. Types Of Conflict Conflicts are categorized in three types : • Personal • Group • Organizational All three can be further classified as intra and inter conflicts.

18. Intrapersonal Conflict • This conflict is the result of tensions and frustrations within the individual. It happens because the person is not clear about his role; he/she sets two mutually exclusive goals for himself.

19. Role-Related Intrapersonal Conflict • Intrarole Conflict • Interrole Conflict • Personal-role conflict

20. Goal Related Conflict • Approach-Approach Conflict • Approach- Avoidance Conflict • Avoidance- Avoidance Conflict

21. Intrapersonal Conflict These Conflicts occurs when two persons’ attitudes, behavior and actions are in opposition. Personality clashes lead to interpersonal conflicts in organizations. Interpersonal conflicts also result when there is a lack of clarity in terms of understanding one’s role in a given situation with respect to another person.

22. Intragroup Conflict It is a form of interpersonal conflict. It includes disagreements between group members on certain issues, thereby leading to ineffectiveness in the group’s functioning. It is a very common feature of family-run businesses where the conflict becomes more intense when the owner or the founder is about to retire or dies untimely.

23. Intergroup Conflict Conflicts between teams and groups. Result because of opposition, disagreements and disputes between the teams. Both positive and negative consequences +ve= Increases the group cohesiveness, generating commitment and loyalty towards the group. -ve= Distances people from each other, making them hostile towards each other.

24. Stages Of Conflict

25. Conflict exists when one party perceives that another party may negatively effect something that first party cares about. The development of antecedent conditions or sources of conflict mark beginning of process which proceeds through five stages.

26. Stage 1: Latent Conflict In this stage, factors that could become a cause of potential conflict exist. Factors that can cause conflict are : • Change in organisational direction • Role conflict • Assignment of new project to already overloaded workforce • Unexpected Occurrence (promised salary increase that does not happen)

27. Stage 2: Perceived Conflict • This is the point where team members become aware of the problem and feel that other party is likely to frustrate their goals. • Incompatibility of needs is perceived and tension begins because the concerned parties begin to worry about what will happen. • Misunderstanding each others position also result in conflicts. • Such conflicts can be resolved by improving communication between the groups.

28. Stage 3: Felt Conflict • This is the stage where the conflict is not just perceived but also felt. • They become emotionally involved and focus on opposing interests and difference in opinions. • Internal tensions and frustrations begin to crystallise and people begin to build negative emotions. • Negative emotions produce low trust and negative perceptions of the other party’s position.

29. Stage 4: Manifest Conflict • In this stage, parties engage in behaviour which evokes response from each other. • Most obvious of which are Open aggression, sabotage, apathy. • Actions range from minor disagreements, questioning and challenging at one end to verbal attacks, threats, physical attacks and even efforts to destroy the other party.

30. Stage 5: Conflict Outcome The aftermath of a conflict can have both negative and positive repercussions for the organisation depending upon how the conflict is resolved. • If the conflict is genuinely resolved to the satisfaction of all participants, the basis for more cooperative relationship may be laid . • But if the conflict is merely suppressed and not resolved, the latent conditions of the conflict may be aggravated and explode in more serious form till they are rectified.

31. Strategies for managing Conflict Optimally People can handle interpersonal conflict in five ways. These styles represent various combinations of assertiveness and cooperation. The individual may use any of the styles to solve conflicts. Major styles are: • Avoiding style • Forcing or dominating style • Accommodating style • Collaborating style • Compromising style

32. Avoiding Style This enables a person to stay neutral, ignore disagreements and conflicts. This approach reflects: • Aversion to tension and frustration • Decision to let a conflict work out itself • Can have negative effects (unfair evaluation by others and frustration)

33. Suitability of Avoiding Style • When issue is minor or only of passing importance and not worth the individual time or energy. • When individual does not have enough information to handle the conflict. • When others can effectively resolve the conflict. • When individual power is so less than the other person’s

34. Forcing or Dominating style • Assertive and uncooperative behavior. • People try to achieve their goals without any concerns for others. • Represent a win-lose approach to interpersonal conflict. • Leads to unfavorable evaluation by others. • Leaders threaten and use demotion, dismissal, negative performance evaluations to gain compliance.

35. Suitability of Forcing style • When emergencies require quick actions. • When a person needs to take action for self protection. • Unpopular course of action must be taken for long term organizational effectiveness and survival (dismissal of employees for unsatisfactory performance)

36. Accommodating Style • Unassertive and cooperative behavior. • Unselfish and long term strategy to encourage cooperation by others. • Some may perceive individuals as weak and submissive also. • Reduced tensions and stress by reassurance and support for both the parties. • Shows concerns for emotional aspects of the conflicts.

37. Suitability of Accommodating style This style is effective in short run when: • Maintaining harmony and avoiding disruptions are important. • Conflicts are based on personalities of individuals and cannot be easily resolved. • The individual is in potentially explosive emotional conflict situation. • The issue is more important to other party and you want them to learn from their mistakes.

38. Collaborating Styles It refers to strong, cooperative and assertive behaviors and is the win-win approach to conflict handling. Person who uses this style tends to : • See conflict as natural and helping • Exhibit trust in others • Recognize satisfaction of all • Share, examine and assess the reasons of conflicts to develop an alternative

39. Suitability of Collaborating Styles • There is parity in power among individuals so that they feel free to interact. • There is a potential for mutual benefits by resolving the dispute through win-win process. • There is sufficient organizational support for investing the time and energy. • There is a specific framework set by top management (discouraging conflicts through rewards and punishments)

40. Compromising Style • Most widely used and commonly accepted style of handling conflicts. • Refers to behavior at an intermediate level of cooperation and assertiveness. • It engages in give and take strategy and can make series of concessions. • Reflects pragmatic way of handling conflicts and maintain good relations for future. • Aim is not to maximize mutual satisfaction but to achieve moderate satisfaction of each party.

41. Suitability of Compromising Style This style is appropriate when: • Conflicting goals or opposing interests exist. • Achieving win-win condition is not possible. • Agreements enable a person to be better off or at least not worse off, than if no agreements were reached.